Question:

Discuss the feminist critique of the traditional perspective on security.

Answer:

The aim of this paper is to establish a better understanding of the feminist critique of the traditional perspective on security. In the context of this discussion, aspects of feminist international relations theory come to the fore. This debate is of great relevance considering the current national and international environment characterized by volatility in the form of crises and incidences of violence. It is unfortunate that in such an environment, issues relating to gender and women tend to disappear from view. International relations experts, particularly those who adopt a feminist view, are rarely consulted for comments on the best ways of dealing with large-scale organized violence.

To begin with, the traditional perspective on security emphasizes a lot on militarism and “hard” masculinity (Buck, Gallant, & Nossal, 1998). In such realms, it is almost improbable that any form of feminist examination will be sought. Nevertheless, the truth of the matter is that feminists have many useful contributions to make regarding these aspects of international politics. This paper sets out to discuss the various ways in which the feminist critique can be of relevance by providing a better understanding and continuous improvement of traditional conceptions of security.

One of the most important reasons why proponents of traditional perspectives on security shun feminism is because it is a highly contested and complicated project (Cohn, 1987). Feminist ideas trigger fierce opposition from older international relations (IR) models because they explicitly adopt a normative stance. This makes the feminist stance very different from all the other social science models. The feminist model of international relations also seems different because of the way it is linked to the women’s movement as well as everyday gender politics.

Women’s voices, suggestions, and experiences have proven to be of great relevance throughout the twentieth century. Unfortunately, these voices and experiences have not always been maximally exploited. For instance, during the World War I, more than 1,000 women originating from various countries pushed for a peace settlement  that was far much better than the one that was imposed through the Treaty of Versailles (Tickner, 2002). These deliberations among women led to the establishment of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF). The aim of this organization was to establish a relationship between war, masculinity, nationalism, and violence.

At the same time, other suggestions were being provided, particularly by international socialist feminists. For these feminists, capitalist expansion and imperialism lay down the groundwork for the emergence of war (Detraz, 2009). However, international relations theory opted to use a different way of addressing security threats facing the world.

The feminist critique of the traditional perspective on security constitutes what has come to be known as the “third debate”. According to Pettman (2004), this critique has in many cases provided an excellent platform on which to challenge international relations’ disciplinary boundaries. In this way, feminism has emerged as one of the critical positions commonly cited as a viable alternative to the traditional perspective on security in the contemporary world.

One of the criticisms of the feminist model of international security is that it lacks clear boundaries (Enloe, 2000). Feminism is also criticized because of the differences it makes with regard to what it means to be a male or female member of society. Feminists are also very interested in how aspects of gender radiate in various dimensions of identity and power. However, there is consensus that feminism brings to IR an insightful understanding of the ways in which issues relating to world politics and IR are already gendered (O’Hare, 1999).

Feminists also point out that our human intellectual competence transcends gender boundaries. As a political project, feminism informs and is informed by political struggle in various aspects of IR, particularly those relating to international peace and security. There are numerous examples showing how feminism has informed the contemporary international political struggle in the search for peace and security. For instance, feminism has had a far-reaching impact on both the international media and the United Nations. During the 1990s, this influence was evident in a series of international conferences organized and attended by women who play a crucial role as stakeholders in international security (O’Hare, 1999). During these conferences, an international political and conceptual language was developed to promote a global women’s movement for mobilizing and building links between national and international aspects of security.

The feminists who organized the international conferences of the 1990s were aware of the fact that the Cold War had ended and the world was in search of a new international order. Feminists were compelled to analyze, respond to, and confront other numerous challenges that turned out to be defining moments of the last decade of the twentieth century. Some of the issues that had far-reaching gender impacts include globalization and the emergence of the neo-liberal market (Shepherd, 2006). In this context, the political space with which claims could be made against the state was drastically reduced. Furthermore, the emergence of globalization and the neo-liberal market was marked by renewed concerns about the devastating impact on the lives of women and livelihoods of millions of families across the world. In this context, feminists felt compelled to raise their collective voice in order to have a positive impact on international security.

The feminist critique has particularly been assertive in highlighting the relationship between the movements whose political identities were increasingly exclusivist and the emergence of “new wars” (Blanchard, 2003). Blanchard (2003) points out that although these wars have mostly been fought in non-western countries, they have had far-reaching western implications. Feminists have documented the crucial role that women from different parts of the world have played in these identity movements.

Women have continued to provide a feminist critique of the traditional perspective on security even during the twenty first century. This contribution has made it easier for women’s voice to be heard particularly in relation to the identity conflicts inherent in today’s transitional conflicts. A better understanding of these identity conflicts is created through a critical analysis of various cultural reassertions that characterize mainstream conceptualizations of security issues. In this way, the feminist critique contributes to a better understanding of contemporary aspects of war, peace, nationalism, militarization, and religious fundamentalism. Moreover, it has brought to the fore the need for feminist IR to be positioned in a manner that addresses aspects of global political economy in relation to global militarism and globalization.

In the meantime, one of the most enduring legacies of the feminist critique is the emergence of a clear feminist position on war and violence. One of the ways through which this legacy was established was through the international campaign against gender violence. Since the early 1990s, feminist scholars have made efforts to address issues relating to gender violence, mainly through international conferences in the presence of media and state leaders (Blanchard, 2003).

Towards this end, exchanges between feminist activists, academics, and practitioners have proved highly productive by providing a reality check as far as the plight of women in times of war and violence is concerned. Carpenter (2003) points out that in this way, the exchanges have provided a rationale for factoring in everyday women’s experiences into the contemporary IR account.

Moreover, feminists succeeded in stipulating a clear position on 9/11 and the subsequent War on Terror (Carpenter, 2003). They called for a reconfiguring of contemporary politics to address the symbol of loss, spectacle, and grief that characterized the War on Terror (Carpenter, 2003). The underlying message of the feminist critics was that responses to terrible loss in times of terrorist attacks need not trigger inevitably violent responses overnight. The critics maintained that military reaction should only be chosen when there are no alternatives. In this way, the feminists have become staunch opponents of war talk and the so-called “military security at the slightest provocation”.

Finally, contrary to the views of some proponents of the traditional perspective on security, gender did not disappear from the post-9/11 terror war debate. The presence of women was felt in a way that constituted a gendered war story. The image created was of that of women who suffered alongside men as victims of both the 9/11 and the war on terror. In this way, the feminist critique sought to dispel the myth of protection that is based on the traditional belief that men must fight for their women while the women themselves sit passively as pawns in contemporary international politics.

References

Blanchard, E. (2003). Gender, International Relations, and the Development of Feminist Security Theory. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 1289-1312.

Buck, L., Gallant, N. & Nossal, K. (1998). Sanctions as a Gendered Instrument of Statecraft. Review of International Studies, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 69-84.

Carpenter, R. (2003). Women and Children First: Gender Norms and Humanitarian Evacuation in the Balkans, 1991-1995. International Organization, Vol. 57, No. 4, pp. 661-694.

Cohn. C. (1987). Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense Intellectuals. Signs, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 687-718.

Detraz, N. (2009). Environmental Security and Gender: Necessary Shifts in an Evolving Debate. Security Studies, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 345-369.

Enloe, C. (2000). Masculinity as Foreign Policy Issue. Foreign Policy in Focus, Vol. 5, No. 36, pp. 290-3118.

O’Hare, U. (1999). Realizing Human Rights for Women. Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 21, No. 8, pp. 364-402.

Pettman, J. (2004). Feminist International Relations after 9/11. Brown Journal of World Affairs, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 85-96.

Shepherd, L. (2006). Veiled References: Constructions of Gender in the Bush Administration Discourse on the Attacks on Afghanistan Post-9/11. International Feminist Journal of Politics, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 19-41.

Tickner, J. (2002). Feminist Perspectives on 9/11. International Studies Perspectives, Vol. 3, Vol. 4, pp. 333-350.